Something's missing

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjvXFxcogG0[/YOUTUBE]

I feel it is.. The palace is def not a modern day palace.. The hairstyles and saris are def 1940s.. Use of horses is also 40s.. Vintage Cars is also 40s.. The reason it prob doesnt feel much different is because Indian TV doesnt have many shows based on a contemporary modern life style.. They focus a lot on rural areas of India like in Diya Bati or Yeh Rishta.. with very orthodox characters.. As that is what sells with the masses.. There are very few contemporary shows like Reporters and what not.. But its something Indian Tele as a whole must improve on.. I agree a little bit more focus on mannerisms and life style could be added to make it more 40s.. They have done their research but not well enough.. The lavish sets we are all use to seeing on screen for example even Ekta had them..

May be because Gayatri is shown very progressive based on those times and that's what was said in the articles too as she's spoiled ny her father. He has given her lots of freedom, and for Rana's family, because they have British's influence because of the time the show is set in? But the rest of the people in town does show its 1940s except these two families because the reasons I mentioned.

Originally posted by: grumpydwarf

I feel it is.. The palace is def not a modern day palace.. The hairstyles and saris are def 1940s.. Use of horses is also 40s.. Vintage Cars is the reason it prob doesnt feel much different is because Indian TV doesnt have many shows based on a contemporary modern life style.. They focus a lot on rural areas of India like in Diya Bati or Yeh Rishta.. with very orthodox characters.. As that is what sells with the masses.. There are very few contemporary shows like Reporters and what not.. But its something Indian Tele as a whole must improve on.. I agree a little bit more focus on mannerisms and life style could be added to make it more 40s.. They have done their research but not well enough.. The lavish sets we are all use to seeing on screen for example even Ekta had them..

Thankgod its just not me...I was excitedto watch this... but the first episode was dissapointing...other than the palace nothing was exciting...the only period dressing is done to drashti and well the way they have done makes her look older and heavier...dd character still feels like geet...nothing new in her character...if you close your eyes and listen to her dialogues you feel like watching geet again. The language, delivery, expressions and mannerism is similar to geet...

Originally posted by: vasuja

Thankgod its just not me...I was excitedto watch this... but the first episode was dissapointing...other than the palace nothing was exciting...the only period dressing is done to drashti and well the way they have done makes her look older and heavier...dd character still feels like geet...nothing new in her character...if you close your eyes and listen to her dialogues you feel like watching geet again. The language, delivery, expressions and mannerism is similar to geet...

The brooding hero and over the top bubbly heroine is done to death... i have a bad feeling that this is gonna be another drag fest. The only person interesting seems to be siddharth as of now...he is trying his best and looks like a king...rajamatha is again bad acting...she is trying to be arrogant and all but the acting is so dull no passion nothing...

Dissapointed cvs... same angry young man and bubbly girl with little period royal garnishing...thats it.

Why cant we have sensible serials...

Gaytri is no were near geet .
Come on its better than geet .
Drashti as gaytri is the best thing this show .
Actress / actors can't change there voice lol .
Gaytri is not bubbly she is shown as matured and sensible and a book lover .
Those days women wore such sarees which a 6 yards ask u granny they will give u correct feedback .
Stop comparing it with geet pls .
Tm didn't say as u think she said something missing not like u comparing geet .
Which is no were geet .
All actress do similar bubbly roles but graph of the role change accordingly to the situation .
Go watch 3 episodes of ek tha again the graph of gaytri is changing .
Few ppl said madhubala too is like geet but it was not its a hit so allow the show to grow bit by bit .
Review of this show is positive so stop calling it geet pls
Geet had no family here gaytri has dotting parents whose pampered her and strong individual unlike geet who needed maan in each way but gaytri knows to deal with wrong things unlike geet who was weak .
Her graph will change slowly .
This show is promising because of huge star cast what had geet only maan geet nothing no story here there is strong story to tell and director is pretty neat .
Some how I feel ur not watch it because if u would have seen ep2 and 3 were gaytri showed so many shades in her character .

Originally posted by: grumpydwarf

I feel it is.. The palace is def not a modern day palace.. The hairstyles and saris are def 1940s.. Use of horses is also 40s.. Vintage Cars is also 40s.. The reason it prob doesnt feel much different is because Indian TV doesnt have many shows based on a contemporary modern life style.. They focus a lot on rural areas of India like in Diya Bati or Yeh Rishta.. with very orthodox characters.. As that is what sells with the masses.. There are very few contemporary shows like Reporters and what not.. But its something Indian Tele as a whole must improve on.. I agree a little bit more focus on mannerisms and life style could be added to make it more 40s.. They have done their research but not well enough.. The lavish sets we are all use to seeing on screen for example even Ekta had them..

If u don't like don't watch it if u keep on going deep .
Gaytri family used deyas if u watch carefully and that was 1940s English ppl ruled u see

Originally posted by: vasuja

Thankgod its just not me...I was excitedto watch this... but the first episode was dissapointing...other than the palace nothing was exciting...the only period dressing is done to drashti and well the way they have done makes her look older and heavier...dd character still feels like geet...nothing new in her character...if you close your eyes and listen to her dialogues you feel like watching geet again. The language, delivery, expressions and mannerism is similar to geet...

The brooding hero and over the top bubbly heroine is done to death... i have a bad feeling that this is gonna be another drag fest. The only person interesting seems to be siddharth as of now...he is trying his best and looks like a king...rajamatha is again bad acting...she is trying to be arrogant and all but the acting is so dull no passion nothing...

Dissapointed cvs... same angry young man and bubbly girl with little period royal garnishing...thats it.

Why cant we have sensible serials...

Originally posted by: prc_fan1

The sets (including the cars, horses, palace) & the costumes are 1940s. But the rest isn't.

Firstly the way the people in the 1940s used to speak is pretty different. And I know this as a matter of fact because my grandparents were born in that era & they used to live in India back then. Furthermore, this is set in a village or small town, not even a city.

Secondly, the way they interact with each other, address one another is typical hindi soapish & very modern day. Kings back then were inaccessible to the public. I can't believe that the king (Sid's character) actually entered Gayatri's house because the vase fell. Furthermore, he even listened to Gayatri retort in a loud voice & disallow the guards from checking. Even my dad who was watching the show remarked that if someone even spoke in such a tone, the king would take the girl away.

Thirdly, electricity used to be a huge problem. In the day light, people did not make much use of electricity. It would go on & off. And the lighting in Gayatri's house is so modern.

There are many more things that are off. I did not even research but this is basic general knowledge anyone can logically think of. If you can't even make a show with basic details, then why use that premise?